English
by not making it nasal with an open mouth, is called making a niggahita into a vimutta. Thus, making a dhanita when a sithila should be made, making a sithila when a dhanita should be made, making a niggahita when a vimutta should be made, making a niggah... These four pronunciations, "ite", "kattabbe", "vimuttanti", within the formal act, spoil the act. Indeed, one who speaks thus, when one letter should be spoken, speaks another, is said to make a mispronunciation. But in the other six pronunciations, such as long and short, in the place of a long vowel, a long vowel indeed, and in the place of a short vowel, a short vowel indeed, thus, by speaking that very letter in its proper place, without destroying the tradition that has come down in succession, the formal act should be performed. If, however, not doing so, when a long vowel should be spoken, one speaks a short, or when a short vowel should be spoken, one speaks a long; similarly, when a heavy syllable should be spoken, one speaks a light, or when a light syllable should be spoken, one speaks a heavy; or when a connected sound should be spoken, one speaks a separated, or when a separated sound should be spoken, one speaks a connected; even if spoken thus, the formal act is not invalidated. Indeed, these six pronunciations do not invalidate the act. But what the Suttanta elders say: "The 'da' sound becomes 'ta', the 'ta' sound becomes 'da', the 'ca' sound becomes 'ja', the 'ja' sound becomes 'ca', the 'ya' sound becomes 'ka', the 'ka' sound becomes 'ya'; therefore, when 'da' and so on should be spoken, speaking 'ta' and so on is not contradictory," that, when it comes to the formal act, is not permissible. Therefore, by one who upholds the Vinaya, neither should 'da' be made 'ta', ...nor 'ka' be made 'ya'. Having purified the pronunciation according to the Pāli text, avoiding the faults mentioned in the ten kinds of pronunciation, the formal act should be performed. Otherwise, indeed, it is called a failure of the announcement. Or, "He announces at the wrong time," meaning, for the announcement, at the wrong time, in an unsuitable place, without establishing the motion, first performing the act of announcement, and afterwards establishing the motion. Thus, by these five ways of announcement, the acts fail. 486. But regarding the failure of a boundary, an "excessively small boundary" is that which cannot hold twenty-one bhikkhus. In the Kurundi, however, it is said: "where twenty-one bhikkhus cannot sit." Therefore, such a boundary, even if it is approved, is not approved, it is like a village field, an act performed there is invalidated. . This method applies to the remaining boundaries as well. Here, an extremely large boundary is one that, even by the tip of a hair, exceeds three yojanas when consecrated. A broken mark is called an unjoined mark. Having recited a mark in the eastern direction, it is proper to recite marks in due order in the southern, western, and northern directions, and then to recite again the previously recited mark in the eastern direction and establish it; thus it is an unbroken mark. If, however, one brings them in order, recites a mark in the northern direction, and establishes it there, it is a broken mark. Another kind of broken mark is one that is consecrated by making a single mark in between an unsuitable mark, such as a tree with hard wood, a stump, or a heap of dust or a heap of sand. A shadow mark is one that is consecrated by making any shadow, such as the shadow of a mountain, as a mark. A no-mark boundary is one that is consecrated without reciting any marks at all. One who stands outside the boundary consecrates the boundary means one recites the marks and stands outside the marks to consecrate. One consecrates a boundary in a river, in the ocean, in a natural lake: even if one consecrates in these rivers and so forth, that boundary, even if thus consecrated, is still unconsecrated, according to the saying: “All rivers, monks, are no-boundaries, all oceans are no-boundaries, all natural lakes are no-boundaries.” One boundary infringes upon another boundary means one's own boundary infringes upon another's boundary. It overlaps means one's own boundary overlaps another's boundary. How the infringement and the overlapping occur, all that has been stated in the Uposatha Khandhaka. Thus, these eleven kinds of boundaries are no-boundaries, just like village fields; any act performed while sitting in them is invalid. Therefore it is said: “By these eleven aspects, acts fail due to the boundary.” 487-488. As for the failure of acts due to the assembly, there is nothing unclear. Whatever should be said there regarding the characteristics of those entitled to the act and those who have given their consent, that too will be stated later under “four monks.” It has been said in the manner of "those who are present and fit for the action" and so on. Therein, "those who are present and fit for the action" means, in an action requiring four, four present monks, not suspended, not expelled, of pure conduct, are fit for the action, worthy of the action, suitable masters. Without them, that action is not performed. Neither their consent nor their purity is given. But the rest, even if they are a thousand in number, if they are of the same communion, all are worthy of giving consent. Having given their consent and purity, whether they come or not, the action stands. But for whom the Sangha performs an action like 'parivāsa', he is neither fit for the action, nor worthy of giving consent. Moreover, because the Sangha performs the action making that person the object, therefore he is called "worthy of the action." In other actions too, this is the same method. 489. Again, the method beginning with "four actions" and so on, is said for showing the unsuitability of eunuchs and so on as objects. The rest here is clear. The Story of the Declaration Action 495-496. Now, for showing the distinctions of those actions, he says, beginning with "How many categories does the declaration action go to?" Therein, regarding "The declaration action goes to five categories – re-admittance, expulsion, the bhaṇḍu action, the Brahma-punishment, and the fifth is the characteristic of the action itself" – here, "re-admittance, expulsion" is said due to the closeness of the words. But first there is expulsion, afterwards re-admittance. Therein, that punishment and removal of the thorny novice should be understood as "expulsion." Therefore, at present, even if a novice speaks ill of the Buddha, Dhamma, or Sangha, declares "unsuitable is suitable," is of wrong view, endowed with an extreme-grasping view, he, having been admonished up to three times, should be made to abandon that doctrine. If he does not abandon it, having assembled the Sangha, he should be told, "Abandon it!" If he does not abandon it, by a competent monk, having performed a declaration action, he should be expelled. And thus the action should be performed: "The Sangha... Venerable sir, I ask the Saṅgha: ‘This novice, named so-and-so, is a dispraiser of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Saṅgha, and holds wrong views. The sharing of a bed with bhikkhus for two or three nights, which other novices receive, is not to be given to him. His expulsion is approved by the Saṅgha.’ A second time… a third time, venerable sir, I ask the Saṅgha: ‘This novice, named so-and-so, is a dispraiser of the Buddha… His expulsion is approved by the Saṅgha.’ ‘Go, you wretch, perish!’ Then, at a later time, if he says, ‘Venerable sir, I did this out of foolishness, ignorance, and lack of good fortune. I ask the Saṅgha for forgiveness,’ he should be reinstated by an act of announcement, after being asked to apologize up to three times. And he should be reinstated thus: A competent bhikkhu should announce to the Saṅgha, with the Saṅgha’s permission, in the midst of the Saṅgha: ‘Venerable sirs, I ask the Saṅgha: This novice, named so-and-so, was a dispraiser of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Saṅgha, and held wrong views. He was expelled from receiving the sharing of a bed with bhikkhus for two or three nights, which other novices receive. Now he is gentle, humble in conduct, has entered the state of shame, is established in moral shame and dread, has performed the penalty, and confesses his transgression. Is the Saṅgha pleased to restore to this novice the former bodily association and communal sharing?’ This should be said three times. Thus, the act of announcement serves for both reinstatement and expulsion. The penalty of 'Bhaṇḍukamma' is already mentioned in the commentary on the Mahākhandhaka. The Brahma-penalty is already mentioned in the Pañcasatikakkhandhaka. Moreover, this is not only prescribed for Channa, but also for any other bhikkhu who is garrulous, who lives by vexing, scolding, and disparaging bhikkhus with harsh words. It should be imposed on him too. And it should be imposed thus: A competent bhikkhu should announce to the Saṅgha, with the Saṅgha’s permission, in the midst of the Saṅgha: ‘Venerable sirs, the bhikkhu named so-and-so is garrulous, and lives by vexing bhikkhus with harsh words. Whatever that bhikkhu wishes, he may say. That bhikkhu should not be spoken to by bhikkhus, He should not be advised, he should not be instructed. I ask the Saṅgha, Sirs: ‘Does the Saṅgha approve of giving the brahmadaṇḍa to the monk named so-and-so?’ A second time I ask, a third time I ask: ‘Does the Saṅgha approve, Sirs, of giving the brahmadaṇḍa to the monk named so-and-so?’ After some time, when he has behaved properly and asked for forgiveness, the brahmadaṇḍa should be lifted. And it should be lifted thus: A competent monk should announce it in the midst of the Saṅgha: “Sirs, the Saṅgha of monks gave the brahmadaṇḍa to the monk such-and-such. That monk is gentle, of humble conduct, has entered into the state of shame, is established in moral dread, and stands in future restraint